Realistic vehicles with fake names or unrealistic vehicles with fake names?

[-Gews- 1]

I'd like to see the stuff they can name to receive the proper names but for example the slammer being renamed the Merkava would be stupid as that's the Israeli designation for the tank - the US would give it its own designation, you know, like they've done for every other vehicle they've used from another nation.

True, but I think the US would name the tank after a general, like many of their other armored vehicles, Sherman, Stuart, Bradley, Chaffee, Pershing, Sheridan, Patton, Abrams, etc - but who knows, maybe there was a General Slammer :p

[chortles 263]

Thanks a lot, you just made me imagine the Puller tank. :p

Note: In an "AAA" example, everything "US team" in Battlefield 3 (both vehicles and infantry weapons) was either using military designation or deliberately inaccurate (though close, i.e. "ACW-R" in place of "ACR"), no "US team" weapons were "copyright infringing for authenticity's sake".

[Kerc Kasha 102]

The US using a Merkava is only slightly more likely than the US using a T-90. BIS should have at least made a tank that was unique to the US instead of just recycling something they already had. I mean there are photos of the autoloaded M1 CATTB with an upgraded turret and new gun on the web, they should have just used that. Using the Merkava was just lazy.

I wouldn't call it lazy as it's not like the Merkava was a copy paste it was a brand new vehicle for ARMA 3. More a poor choice if anything

[progamer 14]

You can vote up this ticket here: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=12966

A better ticket than mine for using real names.

---------- Post added at 07:04 ---------- Previous post was at 06:56 ----------

Thanks a lot, you just made me imagine the Puller tank. :p

Note: In an "AAA" example, everything "US team" in Battlefield 3 (both vehicles and infantry weapons) was either using military designation or deliberately inaccurate (though close, i.e. "ACW-R" in place of "ACR"), no "US team" weapons were "copyright infringing for authenticity's sake".

Wish Arma 3 used some of the standard modern vehicles that Battlefield 4 has. And tried the same as EA to make the names realistic by militery designation or by changing the name very slightly.

[PN11A 2]

I know for fact that the Ghost Hawk and Hunter are not modeled accurately so they would not be able to fall under that rule that EA used. You guys want real names thats understandable I just don't see it being possible. Especially considering the sensitive nature of some of those vehicles.

Edited November 9, 2013 by PN11A

[squirrel0311 16]

I know for fact that the Ghost Hawk and Hunter are not modeled accurately so they would not be able to fall under that rule that EA used. You guys want real names thats understandable I just don't see it being possible. Especially considering the sensitive nature of some of those vehicles.

Well I doubt either of us have any experience with the ghosthawk so yeah that one is clearly speculation but what is so off about the M-ATV? Are you speaking in regards to performance and internal technology or what?

Also I've been wondering lately, besides the fact that the full game should have been a "Full Game" with full content.. What is the problem again with waiting for new vehicles or having them modded in from the community? Are modded vehicles generally speaking not as smooth running or good in some way? If this is the case I've never experienced it....

[chortles 263]

It just comes down to the fact that modded-in vehicles not vanilla so they'll only be available for offline play, or for online play on servers and missions that allow or require those specific mods.

[squirrel0311 16]

It just comes down to the fact that modded-in vehicles not vanilla so they'll only be available for offline play, or for online play on servers and missions that allow or require those specific mods.

Oh yeah well I knew that, I guess I just kind of expected it as the normal thanks to Arma 2. That would be nice to have them as vanilla then because I really don't like having to run a ton of mods.

I don't know much about modding but would it be possible for the community to make the necessary "All included" Vehicle mod and then send that information to BIS for them to tweak and release as a patch that adds the content in to the Vanilla?

[chortles 263]

The thing is that Maruk specifically ruled out an official port of the Arma 2 content, so while the devs will release the Arma 2 library (i.e. MLODs) for modders to make "derivative works" in Arma 3 from, I guess analogous to the Arma 1 sample models... they'll still be mods.

[Grek 10]

Global modpack (weps + vehicles) from A2 and offical addons will be very cool IMHO

[L3TUC3 32]

Global modpack (weps + vehicles) from A2 and offical addons will be very cool IMHO

Cool yes. Everyone wants more stuff to play with. Unfortunately the underlying engine changes and feature additions have changed the way models, weapons and vehicles are handled. AiA shows the old content simply does not function to an acceptable degree without major work being done on them. It's a big time sink and simply not cost effective to forward port everything while there's still a load of stuff that needs work in the base game. BIS has been pretty clear about that.

I don't see an easy way to patch in A2/OA content unlike A2 to OA through CO. I think the mlod release to modders to update the content to A3 levels is the best possible outcome next to BIS doing it themselves. However, I don't see a problem with BIS including the resulting addon in a patch or free DLC, making it official. Talented modders have been approached and compensated for the inclusion of their work in the past.